A drawing or illustration “can be cited against the claims of a utility patent application even though the feature shown in the drawing was unintended or unexplained.” In re Aslanian, 590 F.2d 911, 914 (CCPA 1979). However, like all references, a drawing or illustration is evaluated and applied on the basis of what it reasonably discloses and suggests to a person having ordinary skill in the relevant technology. In re Baum, 374 F.2d 1004, 1009 (CCPA 1967). An Examiner’s factual finding regarding what any reference discloses must be supported by a preponderance of the evidence. In re Caveney, 761 F.2d 671, 674 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (“preponderance of the evidence is the standard that must be met by the PTO in making rejections”). A preponderance of the evidence is evidence that is more convincing than the opposing evidence. See, C. McCormick, McCormick on Evidence § 339 (2d ed. 1972) ("[E]vidence preponderates when it is more convincing to the trier than the opposing evidence." McCormick, supra, at 793).